Leonardo Rochael Almeida wrote: > I find it rather odd that we're wasting so much time worrying about > backward incompatibility when we have a perfect mechanism to introduce > backward incompatible changes in a way that allows both flavours to be > used by packages in the same application (on a module by module basis > just like Martijn would like): > > * Use a different package name!
We don't have that option, as we're talking about changing the behavior of calling IFoo. The options are: * changing the signature of calling IFoo in a backwards incompatible way, with various transition strategies. * changing the signature of calling IFoo in an almost backwards compatible way (breaking tuple adaptation) * adding new methods to IFoo. Regards, Martijn _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
